Tuned S's vs Stock

[St00ge]

Quote: Originally Posted by roland2003 (original)

IMHO a 15% pulley and Re-map wont make 210bhp anyway ........ .....

i agree. unless of course you start with a high output car before the conversion.

A pulley and remap would yield around 25bhp if you're lucky.

[venox22]

but the major factor of the JCW kit is the Smaller pulley which is 11% smaller

JCW Plugs = no more power
JCW Exhaust = no more than 5bhp
JCW airbox = no more than 3bhp
JCW re-map = prob 0bhp
JCW Head = cant say for sure but the amount of work done on this head is fairly conservative to say the least, same size valves etc
JCW intercooler cover = 0bhp
JCW badges = 0bhp
JCW certificate = 0bhp

The reason people go JCW is for the warranty/hertiage aspect!! hence the price

[roland2003]

Ive just noticed that both tuned cars had 99 Ron fuel and the stock car 95 Ron. Also one of the tuned cars has lighter conventional tyres. A race from say 10mph to 110mph might take around 15 seconds, I would 'expect' maybe 2-3 car lengths lead for the modded cars.? I trust all 3 cars are going to the Castle Combe track day on Sat 30th Sept ? You can get upto 120mph up Avon Rise ,then you get to test bottle/ brakes & suspension too
Best Regards Roland GT Tuning

[Robboc]

Roland.

As I am thinking about having some tuning carried out on my MCS and was thinking about Lohen LCS1 until recently, can you tell me what bhp I should reasonably expect from LCS1 or your GTT210 tune.

Rob

[T-bone S]

Quote: Originally Posted by venox22 (original)

One thing, the by-pass valves on older cars do seem a little worse than on present newer cars, a properly adjusted by-pass valve can make a significant difference sometimes, something which Roland does on all his conversions!! plug plug

Have to say - I can't stress enough how much of a difference this adjustment makes - that along with ensuring that your no leaking around the IC(ie getting better snoot boots).

Was night and day on my MY05 MCS.

[roland2003]

Hi Robbo, GTT210 is circa 210bhp. We use a 'a very discrete looking' -17% SC pulley in the conversion which gives much more mid range pull than you get with a -15% pulley. The conversion also includes (GTT exclusive) re-calibrating of the bypass valve. This is a topic in itself but improves performance and fuel consumpsion too The GTT twin bearing idler pulley and new shorter belt also reduces belt wear and again both are included . Check out details of the 'Free Mini Service' that you get too. ....Brakes, tyres, levels, engine bay valet etc etc.... all included at no extra charge
Best Regards Roland GTT

[Robboc]

I am very interested Roland. There must be +/- tolerances on the 210bhp. What exactly would you expect tolerance wise?

[TallAndy]

The tests were very rough admittedly as no proper electronic recording equipment was used. However i'd say 4 or 5 runs were done with the same drivers. And all the cars were very very closely matched.

I'd say overall the 225 was the quickest but not by very much
Then the 210
Then the 170
But there were runs done where the 170 was on par and quicker than the first 2 cars, could just be bad launches and or driver ability / faster gear changing.

The point thats highlighted though is some cars STOCK can be very quick. And its probably worth seeing what your STOCK car acually produces before you tune it. My girlfriend (Mini Princess) has an 06 MCS with an Alta Induction kit and I struggle to catch her at all if she sets off first, I think the last of stock MCS's 55/06/56 plate's are all pretty dam quick.


A sidepoint.... my JCW is 54plate (facelift) but does it have the slightly lighter crankpully? Because 54 plate cars are slightly different to 05 onwards as they are facelift but they lack the LSD and a few other refinements.

This would also help the 55 plate stocl car + the LSD a little I guess...

[venox22]

is the 05 crank pulley the exact same diameter......Roland?? Have you inspected seen both types of crank pulley???

[T-bone S]

iirc all facelift - (july 04 onwards) have the ligher crankpully - part of the MY05 revisions.

What is your build date?

[TallAndy]

December 04

[venox22]

2003 and approaching 40k miles

I have the common belt squek(even after new belt) and cold start rattle from the belt/tensioner too, so thinking as preventitive maintenance change the tensioner/crank pulley all in one go

[roland2003]

Hi Robbo, the variations are in the cars not in the parts we fit. The variation in Rolling Road accuracy is such that you could get a 'reading' of anywhere between 190 and 250bhp I think its Dave on here got over 250bhp IIRC
Andy the LSD only helps if the wheels are spinning and you are not pointing straight. My R5 we used for alot of drag racing in the late nineties only had standard diff but always spun both wheels as was pointing dead ahead,so nothing could be gained using LSD. On road legal tyres I could get a 2.1 sec 60 foot time. Not bad for a road going FWD car.
Best regards Roland GT Tuning

[duncanbanana]

my guess the 170 bhp and the 225 bhp arnt giving out the bhp you say they are , i bet the 170 is more and the 225 is less
Also driving styles will have a play in it to
Redun mini was faster than mine ,even though we had the same mods done to them, mine was an 03 and is a 05 , the gearbox was the difference his being a little faster due to the gearing

[BlueMax]

Interesting thread! Some comments:

1. I agree that the revised gear ratios make quite a difference in driveability of the MCS, especially standing start acceleration in 1st. Not sure if it is a 'massive' difference, BMW official 0-100km/h figures are 7.4sec 163hp previous gearbox vs 7.2 sec 170hp new gearbox, so only 0.2 sec. I own an April 04 MCS (now with JCW 210 hp). There used to be quite a bit of hesitation, lag in 1st gear pullaway before the JCW, with JCW it is smooth but still does not 'feel' as snappy as a stock 06 MCS which I drove recently. BMW quoted figures 0-100 for the 200hp JCW old gearbox was 6.7 or 6.8 sec if I remember correctly and is now 6.5 or 6.6 for the current 210hp models. An 04 model like mine with 210hp should slot in somewhere between current stock MCS and current 210 JCW MCS, should be closer to the latter. I do not know what it would do head to head with a new stock MCS, keeping in mind that initial pull-off may be a fraction slower with the tall 1st gear but you can then hang on much longer before shifting to 2nd, short shifting earlier must take away some of the initial advantage?
2 Given the above, it is apparant that 0-100 times are still pretty close and on pure straight line accelaration an JCW MCS should not be giving a stock MCS (even with same gearboxes) a thrashing. Life is not all about straight line performance. Point of my reply being - do some in gear overtaking type acceleration and you should see the converted models blow away the stock ones. Certainly the JCW conversion in my instance did not change the straight line acceleration hugely but once the engine is on the boil above 4000 rpm, the performance difference pre and post conversion is like night and day. I same some video footage of an 05 JCW MCS against a JCW MCS racer used in our local production racing class (significantly lighter, optimally tuned etc), both driven by professional racers from standing start over 400m - the racing version pulled ahead but not by nearly as big a margin as I would have expected. Pit them against each other on track and there will be no contest.
Just my 2 cents